Do You Have To See The Whole Zoo?

Usually, my OCD self will try to see the whole zoo, but in reality it is often an exhausting and pointless attempt. Recently, my approach has changed a bit and I try to simply collect 'moments' or 'impressions' during my visit.

One thing to take into account is that some animals are likely to be hiding the whole time, or only active at a certain time during the day. So for instance if a zoo has koalas, I will try to come at their feeding time. But more often than not this kind of information isn't available beforehand. I wish more zoos would give out this kind of practical advice on their website.
 
birdsandbats said:
Recently I was near Brookfield Zoo with my family for non-zoo related reasons, doing other things, and my family, knowing I like zoos, suggested we stop in at Brookfield for a couple hours when we had some time. I told them that I wasn't really interested because a couple hours is not enough time to see the entire zoo. They thought I was crazy for this opinion and fundamentally did not understand why I would rather skip out on the zoo then not see all of it. They felt that some zoo must be better than no zoo. But I disagree.

Upon reflection, these are the reasons I think I feel this way:

-A zoo is only done "properly" if most or all of the facility is seen, and I did not want to visit the zoo "improperly".
-Having limited time at a zoo would require prioritizing certain animals over others, and making the choice of seeing certain animals over others would drive me crazy.

Of course, I don't literally insist on visiting every part of a zoo every time I go. I will occasionally skip areas that only have domestic animals or areas with an extra fee.

I regularly skip exhibits at my most visited zoo, Bay Beach Wildlife Sanctuary, which I average about one a visit a month too. But pretty much other zoos, even ones I visit multiple times a year, I do insist on seeing the entire zoo when I'm there, with occasional exceptions as noted above.

Does anyone else feel this way? Why or why not?
Click to expand...
Hello.

Besides the ant house in São Paulo, I have never intentionally skipped a zoo exhibit, mostly because I tour them while writing a species list on my phone.

My local zoo is small-sized (the visiting area is way too small, to be honest), so I don't really skip anything there because my visit would be too short.

Very few Brazilian zoos have barnyard areas, so we don't have that dilema about skipping a few exhibits. However, if I ever go to Europe again, I might do that to save some time and see the more interesting species.

Believe it or not, red-necked wallabies are uncommon in my country, so seeing them in either Projeto Selva Viva or ZooParque Itatiba. is something I'd rather not skip when touring them.
 
After visiting Nicaragua in november, I had a lay-over in Houston. My flight back to Amsterdam was planned for 16.20 that day, giving me a morning to spend there.

I decided to take a taxi to the Houston Zoo, stayed there until 12, took a taxi back to my hotel, got my Luggage and got on the shuttle to the airport.

It wasmy most expensive 3 hour visit to a zoo ever, and I wasn't able to see everything. Yes, it was frustrating to miss out on certain species and enclosures and having to rush through most of the zoo.

But I am still happy I did it. I got to see some new species (whooping crane completed my set of crane species) and some amazing enclosure designs (Pantanal, Galapagos). Also it was my first US zoo so not only did I add a new zoo to my list, but a new country as well.


When visiting a new zoo without time constraints I usually want to see everything, but I will save the least important stuff for last. That way I still have to option to sacrifice that section if I wanna prioritize revisits to certain enclosures/animals.
 
For me, most of the time no. I tend to go to zoos and aquariums just to seek new (sub)species or domestic breeds for me to photograph and to be displayed in my gallery, which is why I always do research first when visiting certain facilities and most of the times my trips are always short (Sometimes even less than a hour!). The exception is when I went to a new zoos or newly revitalized zoos that I try to spend my time there just to look around (Major plus point if the facility are good and up to modern standard). Additionaly, these new zoos have a lot of new species for me, so sometimes there's a reason for me to go around the entire zoo.
 
Rizz Carlton said:
For me, most of the time no. I tend to go to zoos and aquariums just to seek new (sub)species or domestic breeds for me to photograph and to be displayed in my gallery, which is why I always do research first when visiting certain facilities and most of the times my trips are always short (Sometimes even less than a hour!). The exception is when I went to a new zoos or newly revitalized zoos that I try to spend my time there just to look around (Major plus point if the facility are good and up to modern standard). Additionaly, these new zoos have a lot of new species for me, so sometimes there's a reason for me to go around the entire zoo.
Click to expand...
I also do my own research looking for new species, but skipping a few animals just doesn't seem right to me, if it's an African pygmy goat.

Everytime I visit Itatiba, there are new species around, so I preferably never skip anything there lol.
 
Ideally yes, I do like to get around a zoo's entire site in one visit because I hate missing out, but if this isn't possible due to time constraints, I don't mind skipping maybe one or two areas if it frees up time to see higher priority things.
 
When visiting a new facility, I do try to see as much of it as possible, if not the whole place. Factors do sometimes come into play such as if there's something closed, time restraints, or depending on who I'm with. In the latter two cases, I usually don't have an issue making a cut - normally a children's zoo, bird house, or reptile house so that I can prioritize the stuff I like seeing or had a certain goal to see such as a first-time species. The exception to this being if the facility is well-known for that particular feature, like Pittsburgh's Kids Kingdom or Toledo's Bird House.

For places I've been to previously, I usually have a good idea of the pace I go or a specific plan in mind. This helps me figure out how long to spend in certain areas, if I wish to skip something, or revisit something I haven't seen in a while.
 
If I’m at any zoo other than Toledo I want to see every detail possible, I love seeing zoos I don’t go to very often.

While if I’m going to my home zoo in Toledo and I’m on a time crunch I usually go to the same spots consistently

Arctic Encounter, Primate Forest, Kingdoms of the Apes, Reptile House, Tembo Trail, Tiger Terrace.

If I have the whole day available I usually try to see everything I can.
 
No, and I rarely do. It it is a new zoo I try but if it is large that is often impossible from a time point of view. Anyway, how many lions or elephants do you need to see in a lifetime?

On occasion, I visit a zoo without seeing any animals, as I am there for meetings or other business.

My priorities are:

1. Unique or innovative exhibitory, presentations, and practices
2. Conservation work.
3. Birds and small mammals, then ectotherms.
4. Historical features of note.

I also make sure to check out gift shops, eateries and other income centres.
 
Toledo Zoo Guide said:
If I’m at any zoo other than Toledo I want to see every detail possible, I love seeing zoos I don’t go to very often.
While if I’m going to my home zoo in Toledo and I’m on a time crunch I usually go to the same spots consistently

Arctic Encounter, Primate Forest, Kingdoms of the Apes, Reptile House, Tembo Trail, Tiger Terrace.

If I have the whole day available I usually try to see everything I can.
Click to expand...
That's how I am with Cleveland, haha. I always make sure to hit at least Wilderness Trek, Koalas and African Elephant Crossing. Everything else is kind of a "If I have time"
 
Enzo said:
I also do my own research looking for new species, but skipping a few animals just doesn't seem right to me, if it's an African pygmy goat.

Everytime I visit Itatiba, there are new species around, so I preferably never skip anything there lol.
Click to expand...
Yes, again, I try to see everything especially in new facilities that I have visited for the first time. I'm a frequent visitor to Gembira Loka, their collection in the Reptile & Amphibian Park tend to rotate a lot with very interesting species and their passerine walkthrough aviary will always give you a chance to see a new species if you're lucky. So, I always spend my time a lot in that part of the zoo.

But, with how homogenized the zoos and aquarias here in Indonesia sometimes, you'll get numb seeing the same species and even exhibit design a hundred time :p
 
Last edited:
I am someone who wants to see as much as possible. Per example when going to a zoo I try do all the enclosures and activities there are during my visit. If the zoo is too big to do everything in one day, or when I can’t stay till closing time, I take a look at the zoo map which animals are important for me to see and which ones are not. Of course the more animals I can see, the better, but if choices are to be made I base it on the animals I won’t see everytime when I do a ‘normal’ zoo visit and on my personal favorites (felines, canids, other carnivores, hoofstock, pachyderms, birds of prey, parrots, reptiles, fish, …). It all depends. I also try to do the entire zoo when it’s my first visit I do. I plan to go to Beauval this year and doing the whole zoo is something that would be great.
 
I used to feel this way, but I've found I'm fine skipping exhibits with common animals to prioritize interesting and rare ones. When I was younger, I exclusively tried to do entire zoos, but I find myself skipping areas here or there much more frequently now.
 
I do want to at least walk past everything even if it's a species I'm not too terribly interested in - Sometimes just seeing the exhibit design is fun too. I definitely want to see everything before I leave a zoo. Sadly when I visited Cincinnati Zoo I only got to explore about 50% of it and I'm still sad about it...I'll make it back there someday!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CMP
I feel like the main question of debate of this post has been lost. The argument made in the OP wasn't "Do you generally want to see the entire zoo?" because the answer is, for most of us, "Yes." The question was, "It is even worth going/trying if you can't see the whole zoo?" To which I would also say "yes," but I can understand that some folks feel differently.

For my part, because I often visit new zoos for professional reasons, I don't always have the time/freedom of movement to see the whole zoo. Maybe I'm there meeting a colleague, and we're there for a specific purpose in a specific part of the zoo, and I don't have time to wander. Or, it's an animal transport, in which the goal is to minimize the time and disturbance. I've been to the Bronx Zoo four times by now. I've been in Jungleworld, Madagascar, and the Reptile House four times. I still haven't seen Congo Gorilla Forest (that and the Children's Zoo are the two exhibits I haven't seen there yet).

I thought of the question like this - if someone told me that I could go to a zoo I've always wanted to go to, but could only spend two hours or so, or could only pick three exhibits to see, would I do it, or turn it down until I (hopefully someday) had the chance to see the whole place, I'd still take the quick visit.

I think it's always preferable to see the whole zoo - even those parts you might not have that much interest in - in order to best appreciate the facility and its collection. I've left a new zoo with some great ideas from visiting parts that I might have been tempted to skip, otherwise. But given the option of something versus nothing, I'll take something any day of the week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top